Established Member
Found this site, thanks to the Google ads that pop up regularly:
http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com
It claims that SOHO has found that the Sun's surface is solid and conducts electricity.
Now my Skepty-senses are tingling, and they're telling me this is a load of hooey. Is my intuition right?
- Maha "sun spotted" Vailo
Order of Kilopi
The Sun´s mean density is roughly 1.5 times that of the water. So you should expect the outer layers to display the density of a gas.
Established Member
ooookay.....
given the suns temperatures I'm pretty certain there is absolutely zero way that anything could remain solid. Remember we are talking fusion temperatures here, the whole problem with fusion as an energy source is that you can't use a "solid" container because there isn't anything that stays solid at those temperatures, so you need a magnetic bottle, which a) leaks and b) requires more energy put in than you actually get out of the reaction.
So no I don't reckon that's possible.
Established Member
Of couse the surface of the Sun is solid!
Didn't you learn in school that the Sun is actually a giant ball of flaming dung being rolled across the crystaline spheres by a scarab beetle?
Geez. Some people.
Order of Kilopi
And just think, if the surface of the Sun is solid, we could land a space probe there. To be on the safe side, we'll land there at night!
Order of Kilopi
The photosphere does appear somewhat solid, when viewed through a white light solar filter (in order to see sunspots).
Of course in other wavelengths (HA filter) you can see varying elevations of the atmosphere and the sun is revealed to be a very complex and beautiful to look at object.
http://umbra.nascom.nasa.gov/images/latest.html
Established Member
"The Government put a chip in my brain."
"The President can hear my thoughts!"
"We never landed on the sun!"
"They put flouride in the drinking water!"
"Actually, that one's true."
"No wonder I've been listening to so much pop music."
Order of Kilopi
Sounds like these folks might be working with the guy I met some years ago on the light rail train ... he was explaining to everyone who would listen (meaning everyone near enough that they had to endure it) that the Sun was hollow, mechanized and there were people inside that kept it running. He went into some detail about solar operations. He also explained these were the same guys who fired the nuclear missile at Tunguska . . .
Lucky for me, I reached my stop before he had gone into much detail about Tunguska.
Order of Kilopi
Short answer: Yes, it is nonsense at about the level of Geocentrism. There is just too much evidence about the structure and physics of the sun that says otherwise.Originally Posted by Maha Vailo
Order of Kilopi
His images and links are cool.
I beleive that summarizes the website....More importantly, current models of the sun simply do NOT explain the video images we see through SOHO.
He offers no explanation, however, for all those millions of rocks or planets that his video images show the Sun rotating upon.
Odd that no one at SOHO knows much of what they are seeing. #-o
I wonder if he emailed them? [At least I did regarding the Suns color. ]
Established Member
Don't you get it? This is the proof of Intelligent Design that folks have been looking for! The sun is nothing more than a giant cannon ball, fired from some divine weapon as part of a salvo in a cosmic war against the powers of darkness! How can you not realize that now?
(Just kidding here, folks, don't get your undies in a bunch.)
Newbie
Wouldn't it be possible that an incredibly dense amount of matter could clump up and form a solid? Maybe under extreme pressures or/and high temperatures which I presume the sun yields. It probably wouldn't have the same composition as an actual solid though, but it would form be a solid object.
This is just an idea though, don't take my word for it :wink:
Honored Member
Extreme pressures help with the formation of solids. High temperatures don't.
[edit/word]
Established Member
You can actually do the exercise yourself of measuring the differential rotation of the sun. The equator rotates faster than higher latitudes.
Tough to do if the sun is a solid....
Established Member
But weren't they saying (or at least implying) that the Sun's atmosphere was capable of rotating in a differential manner, and that the atmosphere hides the view of the surface? Or did I miss something?
Established Member
If the atmosphere hides the view of the surface, how can they claim SOHO images as supporting evidence?
Order of Kilopi
I've got it! The Sun is made of Silly Putty.
And one of these days it'll stretch too much, and... SNAP!
:P :wink:
Established Member
I don't know. Actually, I'm not that familiar with what it is that SOHO images show (and what the article was trying to say wasn't all that clear, either). I was just trying to make sure we hadn't overlooked anything.
Established Member
Not sure what the last two photos are supposed to represent nor why they would lead him to believe the surface of the sun is solid. The first appears to be sunspot (I would guess), and does to have a crater appearance similar to other solid objects (as the moon) that might mislead him.
I’m sure the crater appearance come more from the photo being looked at in black and white combined temperature gradients causing upheavals and isolated hot and cold spots within the sun spot.
Does anyone know what SOHO uses for imagery - infrared, visible or other?
**Edited to add quote and comment.
Of course they add the computer enhancements to help them interpret what we see, else you could make the same mistake this guy seems to have made.it became quite apparent that many of the finer details revealed in the raw EIT images are simply lost during the computer enhancement process that is used to create the more familiar EIT (green) images that are displayed on SOHO’s website.
Established Member
You are right - my apologies. I read the article late last night and missed that at first glance. #-oBut weren't they saying (or at least implying) that the Sun's atmosphere was capable of rotating in a differential manner, and that the atmosphere hides the view of the surface? Or did I miss something?
(It's still nuts though...helioseismology has provided a pretty good model of the solar interior. I imagine there would be serious issues with heat transfer, magnetic field generation & spectral analysis with this hypothesis.)
Edited to note: One would have to be concerned that such a radical shift in our understanding based on analysis of 14 Gigabytes of data is presented to the public via a website rather than as what would surely become a seminal paper in a peer reviewed journal...
Order of Kilopi
Phil Hendries did a good Dames rip off as the voice of "General John Jameson" in his "Manned mission to the sun" skit. I heard him call Hoagland during his birthday appearance on Coast. Hendrie was doing Cronkites voice and told Dick Hoagland to get some help.
What was that short story where people had the ability of instant transmission and could go anywhere--but it was all they could do to keep from thinking the word "Sun.?"
Banned
Well, I couldn't help but notice hit, and old Stew here as well, so I thought I'd drop by and see if anyone had a serious SCIENTIFIC objection, or whether this was all just a big "burn the heritic" routine.
FYI, I added a LOT of content to the evidence page over the past week or so that you folks might want to look through. I'd be more than happy to hear a serious scientific objection, but so far this thread looks long on ridicule and short on scientific evidence to refute what I have said.
Moderator
How about it goes against all observed evidence?
Rules For Posting To This Board
All Moderation in Purple
Established Member
According to your model, there is a neon layer that provides both light and a refrigerating effect. First off, if you heat anything up, it will glow and were talking about heating things up to 15,000,000 degrees Celsius. The burner on your stove begins to glow red and provide light at a much lower temperature. Also how can your neon layer provide enough cooling to lower the temperature enough to allow for solids? Iron melts at 1538 degrees C. That’s quit a temperature gradient for your ferrite layer to form.
FYI - The link to your paper and explanation is a bit hard to find and hidden at the bottom of the link you provided. You might get a better response if the people of this board could find it a bit easier.
Banned
Exectly WHAT "observed evidence" are you talking about?
Banned
The TOP of the neon layer is about 6K degrees. The kinds of temps you are talking about are only found in the hydrogen layers of the corona.
[/quote]The burner on your stove begins to glow red and provide light at a much lower temperature. Also how can your neon layer provide enough cooling to lower the temperature enough to allow for solids?[/quote]
It's a great conductor of heat and transfers heat from the silicon layer below very efficiently through convection. You can see this process at the top of the penumbral filaments.
We're not exactly sure of the melting point of calcium ferrite in these conditions, but such temp ranges are quite likely at the bottom of the silicon layer.Iron melts at 1538 degrees C. That’s quit a temperature gradient for your ferrite layer to form.
The response has been extremely gratifying, and it's been found over 6K times now. I've put links to the manuscript on several of the pages.FYI - The link to your paper and explanation is a bit hard to find and hidden at the bottom of the link you provided. You might get a better response if the people of this board could find it a bit easier.
Established Member
I still have to question the neon layer, well, maybe more of a nitpick. You cite in your paper:
Fine, if the layer is at 6 K, that is below NE’s critical temperature and pressure will liquefy it, creating your cooling zone.Liquid neon is used as a cryogenic refrigerant. It has over forty times the refrigerating capacity per volume unit than liquid helium, and more than three times that of liquid helium.
There is one simple and very intriguing possibility, namely there are at least two types a plasma layers between visible photosphere and the ferrite layer below….
…while the upper region of the photosphere …. is actually made of neon.
But you are calling for a layer of NE plasma excited by electrical activity to create our sun’s glow and is produced in the surface (is that your ferrite layer?), and of course plasma is ionized gas…The degree of ionization is determined by the electron temperature relative to the ionization energy (and more weakly by the density) in accordance with the Saha equation. If only a small fraction of the gas molecules are ionized (for example 1%), then the plasma is said to be a cold plasma, even though the electron temperature is typically several thousand degrees. A hot plasma, on the other hand, is nearly fully ionized. This is what would commonly be known as the "fourth-state of matter", which seems to be what you are looking for to have a “plasma layer”. Still pretty dang hot, and you can’t have it both ways. Either you have a cooling effect with liquid neon or a lighting effect with plasma neon.
NOTE: Any body with that really knows plasma physics please jump in!
Banned
It seems to be doing both. I can certainly see it, and there are lower temperatures recorded within that silicon layer during upwellings and sunspots.
They are certainly welcome to join us. The bottom line here is that this is a WORKING model that goes a LOT further than the gas model at explaining the CAUSES of solar moss, change sunspots, solar wind, etc.NOTE: Any body with that really knows plasma physics please jump in!
This model should be taken VERY seriously since it is based on direct overservation from 6 different satellites in space. This is NOT "Bad Astronomy", this 21st century information is going to change everything we think we understand about physics and astronomy.
Established Member
Well, the case or no- what is holding up this silicon shell, as the density of the sun as calculated from mass/volume is 1.4 g/cm^3, while silicon is 2.33 g/cm^3... is it hollow after the silicon layer, and underneath the neon sign... which, well, neon would glow with a different set of spectra than the continuum of the solar spectra, which conforms more to a black-body curve than that of a glowing gas-plasma. This is part of the reason we can figure out what elements are on the sun: emission and absorption spectra (also useful for rough calculation of distances based on H-Alpha absorption lines in Quasars... but I digress).
Banned
These "calculated" numbers for the sun are all based upon the GAS model. I don't see where that applies to a solid surface model.
But Neon HAS been isolated rom the full spectra.neon would glow with a different set of spectra than the continuum of the solar spectra, which conforms more to a black-body curve than that of a glowing gas-plasma.
http://www.physik.rwth-aachen.de/~ha...ge/index1.html
The fact it has other emisions as well, makes it less obvious is all.
At that action is happening at the Calcium Ferrite layers according to the BBSO images.......but I digress.This is part of the reason we can figure out what elements are on the sun: emission and absorption spectra (also useful for rough calculation of distances based on H-Alpha absorption lines in Quasars... but I digress).
Posting Permissions
